#Oj simpson not guilty trial

89, he slaps her and pushes her from a moving vehicle. In 1982, OJ threw Nicole against a wall.Simpson was standing by a trash can afterwards speculations that he stuffed two bags into the trash. Skycap James Williams counted only three bags when OJ got out of the car. Limo driver, Allan Park, testified that OJ entered with five bags when he left Rockingham.Nicole told her therapist, Susan Forward, that she thought OJ would murder her.Her friends Faye Resnick and Robin Grier said Nicole told them OJ was going to kill her.A week before her death, Nicole told her friend Cici Shahian “He’s going to kill me and get away with it and charm the world because he’s OJ Simpson”.It’s believed that the black bag held bloody clothing and the murder weapon (knife).Kato testified that at around 11 PM he was loading OJ’s five bags into the limousine for OJ’s trip to Chicago, and was told not to touch the smallest black bag.Kato heard thumps outside his window by the air conditioning at around 10:50 PM, nearby the bloody glove was found.At 9:37 PM on the night of the murders, Kato Kaelin who lived in the guesthouse on OJ’s estate, saw OJ leaving in a dark blue cotton sweat suit, the same kind of suit that produced the fibres found on Ron Goldman’s shirt.Expert testimonies have stated that the killer walked from the crime scene, not run, proving him to be familiar enough with the surroundings that he felt safe enough to walk.Witness Jill Shively saw OJ speeding in the Bronco around the time of the murders.Nicole had stated that a pair of keys to her condo had been missing a few weeks prior to the murders. LAPD found two sets of keys to Nicole’s condo in OJ’s possession.Nicole’s neighbour said he heard two men arguing and then saw a white van speeding away from the crime scene (could be Ford Bronco).Akita dogs have an aggressive trait, and if there was an intruder it would’ve attacked. Nicole’s dog didn’t attack the killer proving that the dog must’ve known and been comfortable with said killer.She may really want to believe the boy stole the cookie or 'know' it but she can't prove it because there's no real evidence and therefore reasonable doubt. The mom finds an empty glass of milk in the boy's room who was complaining of being hungry but finds no crumbs or used napkins of the cookies. It's like if there are two boys and a cookie goes missing. But again, the circumstantial evidence does not work in his favor for his reputation.

#Oj simpson not guilty trial

Circumstantial evidence may be used to make deductions everyday in the real world but definitely isn't enough for a trial in a court of law. So while there was a wealth of circumstantial evidence that would point in his direction, there was not enough concrete hard evidence implying or showing it was murder on his part and technically a jury cannot find someone guilty unless there is enough evidence to 'prove beyond a reasonable doubt'. He was acquitted in a court of law meaning while on trial he also enjoyed all the protections the law gave him such as fair trial and the burden of proof laying on the prosecutor. Lacking said evidence, the jury must acquit. TL DR: The rules of evidence must be followed in order to convict someone of a crime. So, people being trusting of the police, and given Simpson's record of violence /u/flipmode_squad pointed out, most people believe he should have been found guilty.īut lack of evidence means that Simpson would be acquitted. They used the fact that the chain of custody was broken to supplant this idea. Please note that the defense does not have to prove that the police actually planted evidence. While there was some argument that the police planted evidence, chain of custody was broken so it could not be used. The rules of evidence are there to protect the judicial process. There are a number of other things but this was the main one.īecause this evidence was never heard by the jury, they acquitted Simpson. The prosecution, in this case, did not follow proper evidence procedures, contaminating the evidence. Both the prosecution and the defense have a set a rules but the rules are more strict for the prosecution. Since Simpson said he was 'not guilty', the prosecution has to convince 12 people that he indeed committed a crime and he should be held criminally liable for that crime.

When you go to court, the judge gives you the choice of plea: guilty, not guilty, and a few others that I won't go into. 'You cannot prove I committed the crime.') 'I did not commit the crime') and not guilty (i.e.

justice system, there is a difference between being innocent (i.e.